NSLU: Chart-Lock





Over the past few days, in comments on other threads, I have alluded to, specifically claimed and addressed myself to this “S-l-i-d-e” of the Kansas City Chiefs. We are all witness to it, and completely baffled, or, angry, or sad.


I have posited the responsibility of the rapid descent as belonging as the basic responsibility of the Head Coach. Others have claimed play-calling with which I agree. The defense shored itself up and added a former Pro-Bowl Corner-back. But the offense has nearly completely stalled. Some have said this or that player, and others have believed that it was team chemistry. Even with all the available talent on the offensive side of the ball, tools of high caliber, they lament that we don’t have enough. Too, there are claimants to the “Play-Patrick-Mahomes-Now” group.


Is it enough? Are any and all of these an explanation of why the team overall, has faltered? For me, the less than casual observer, it all falls at the feet of the Head Coach… and the “Three C’s.”


1. Consistency — the team has lacked it, even earlier than the first loss.

2. Cohesiveness — What I believed was the emergence of cohesiveness, lasted about 3 weeks.

3. Continuity — Expression of all factors in exploiting talent and executing successful plays in successive snaps


It doesn’t take a genius to see that these facets of a winning team, have been absent. My calling attention to them is necessary though, to dig into what I think is the over-all problem.


⦁ Lack of Creativeness
⦁ False Belief in X’s and O’s
⦁ Self-Effacing Deliberateness
⦁ Over Thinking
⦁ Inability to adjust or do the Unexpected
⦁ Inability to exploit Top Level Talent in Player match-ups — the real Culprit


To understand the above constructs, I am going to delve into each one but only on the offensive side of the ball. To get to each as an explanation of the offensive stall, the observer has to believe in a false premise. For example, Motion only addresses itself to man-up coverage, for example, or, the offensive line is inept, under powered and mis-used.

Another construct is that Alex Smith is at fault and cannot throw a deep ball. Or, he has happy feet, or, he is off his head. The potential here for blame is as numerous as the varied commenters. The offensive line, being a poorly fielded unit, is unable to effectively block for the Quarterback. Anybody but Al Smith. I have heard it all. In a Presser, Reid observed that Al Smith was part of the problem, the same as all other players on the team. Essentially, Reid became honest to that extent.


He failed to observe his own “contribution” to the failing offensive effort. He failed to address himself now and in the past, with this or that loss, that his construct is part of the problem, his complicated x’s and o’s, as excellent as many of the designed plays may be, falls apart when the other team is able to see the patterns of Reid’s play-calling, the setup of designed plays and how it can be diagnosed by defenses based on play setup and potential.



The basic difficulty I have with Andy Reid relates to his adherence to his own infallibility. For example. I understand from multiple sources, that he scripts 15 plays that he runs through before making an adjustment or changing the script. I have no firsthand knowledge that he does this, but from the results of his game plan and the excution in the game, it appears that these “sources” quoted in other articles is correct. If you go 3 and out 5 times, You have just exhausted his 15 play sequence, clearly, self-effacing deliberateness. I think that is due to:


A FALSE Assumption that if you cross the t’s and dot the i’s, all will be exactly as designed — adherence to the idea that X’s and O’s gets the job done which is in complete disregard of what the opposition is doing to counter Reid’s moves. Thus, adjustments to the game plan and script, and pre-game conception of what the defense is going to do becomes a problem in itself.


It’s true that Reid is an very creative designer of an offense — but what we are seeing is the inability to be creative in the flow of the game. This for me is as key as anything else — the inability to create in the flow means that the flow of the game is going to stall and you will not exploit the talent of the tools you have employed and you are certainly not going to exploit the talent and skill to it’s best implementation.


Let’s be quaker, shall we? If the Form of play doesn’t result in achievement in function, then it is totally FUBAR. The Function of a play is to move the chains and has an end result of scoring points. Reid’s pretty designs don’t work. Go with FUNCTION First. That has been one of  pre-game direction for Reid and the Chiefs that past 2 games. Apparently, I don’t have his ear.




What do I see? An offense that becomes disjointed, predictable and defenses can deploy to stop the offense and get a turn over on downs. The offense just doesn’t make sense in any form, play by play. You establish one thing that works, and you don’t “spin” off of that with a counter. The same way it is anticipated that with cover 2 or a zone means that you are not going to put a player in motion. One reason that you do this is to establish a strong v weak side offense. You put the player in motion one way or the other, such as Hill from a slot position to travel the distance and be ready for a jet sweep or not, forcing the secondary to shift responsibility. This could be to overload one side leaving the weak side with coverage and a mismatch. Or, the mismatch might occur to the strongside as that is the intent of the play — load the strongside for blocking on the weak side, freeing the tight end for a quick slant or even a 10 and post. Like that.




The Three C’s are lost. Out of the gate, the team never gets a flow of plays going and they have no consistency in execution, no integration and no counter to the previous play. They are “DISJOINTED” and purposeless except as a “Stand-Alone” Play.


I watched the Georgia @ Auburn game preceding these observations. My observations about the Chiefs has had continuity and consistency with my thinking and expressing my viewpoint over more than 2 seasons. When I watched this collegiate game, Georgia had “Flow” They expressed three separate receivers in three separate areas of the end zone. The surprise was the throw to the TE TD at the post and this was after HC Smart replied to a reporter, asking why he didn’t utilize the TE more Smart replied that the reporter shouldn’t try to be an offensive Coordinator. But the next game, he did employ the TE and had 6 points for doing so. A thinking coach, not an x’s and o’s coach for me. Smart was reacting to a blowout type loss to Auburn in regular season. He outlined for the defense that 5-10 plays that resulted in scores that if they prevented in the championship SEC game, they would win. They did.


The team that did not adjust was Auburn.



This is really one huge reason that I wish, or, actually, demand that Andy Reid give the play-calling over to Nagy. He is so tied up in his “CHART” that his mind as the HC is gone into a placard and not attending to the field of play. It is my view that Reid has had this problem for more than a decade but that is just my personal view of things.


The apparent disease of Chart Lock prevents Reid from being a “Head Coach” on the field of play.


No matter which way you look at all the different facets of “blame”, about the only one that Reid has said was the problem was in response to all the questions — and he got this one right. We all are part of the problem is essentially what he observed.


He got this one right. For 6 weeks now, he seldom could check the “right” Column in his game plan, script and play-calling and on the field leadership.


David Bell – Avery ID

NSLU: No Stone Left Unturned












If you are viewing this in Apple News and would like to join the Discussion, [GO HERE.](http://arrowheadone.com/nslu-chart-lock/#disqus_thread)


Digiprove sealCopyright secured by Digiprove © 2017

Related posts